A failed project planned to treat Hanford's K Basin radioactive sludge cost $43 million without producing any results, according to an audit by the Department of Energy's Office of Inspector General.
The audit released Tuesday blamed problems on a rush to do the work to meet legal deadlines without first figuring out if the project's technology could be safely used and would work.
The project was canceled in 2007, but not before $43 million was spent over three years on engineering and equipment.
Four years later, DOE has a new strategy for cleanup of the sludge, but the work still is in the design phase, and the audit concluded it was too soon to evaluate the new plan's effectiveness.
However, the projected cost to taxpayers has significantly increased, the audit found.
Previous DOE contractor Fluor Hanford estimated it would cost $104 million to retrieve the sludge from the K Basins, process it, package it and ship it to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico for disposal.
Now CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Co. estimates it will cost almost $175 million to move the sludge from the K Basins, which are 400 yards from the Columbia River, to another facility. That estimate does not include the cost to store the sludge at the interim facility, nor to treat and package it for disposal, according to the audit.
The audit did recognize that "this project addresses a complicated, one-of-a-kind waste with uniquely challenging nuclear chemistry, and that managing a project of this magnitude and complexity ... is no easy matter."
At the end of the Cold War, fuel irradiated to produce plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons program was left unprocessed in water cooling basins attached to the K East and K West reactors. The fuel corroded and formed a radioactive sludge at the bottom of the pools.
The last of the fuel was removed in 2004 and the sludge is being held in underwater containers at the K West Basin.
The year the fuel was removed, Fluor subcontracted with British Nuclear Group America to design and make a modular system called the Contractor's Stabilization and Packaging System to retrieve the sludge, treat it and grout it in 55-gallon drums, according to the audit.
The audit found DOE did not manage the project well, nor did it ensure that Fluor and its subcontractor adequately managed the project.
Instead of using one of five mature technologies outlined in a Pacific Northwest National Laboratory study, British Nuclear chose to heat the sludge to oxidize the uranium to allow it to be shipped and disposed.
The oxidized sludge then was to be grouted and packaged using a commercially available system selected by DOE and contractor officials that had been used in Europe to process low-activity radioactive waste, the audit said. However, the Hanford sludge was much more radioactive and required remote handling to protect workers.
The complex treatment equipment for the system was expected to require a long time to purchase and manufacture. To meet the project schedule, DOE agreed to let Fluor begin to purchase equipment before the design was completed or a preliminary safety analysis had been approved, the audit said.
With money already being spent, British Nuclear commissioned an independent study in 2005 to identify areas of concern. The panel performing the study said it was concerned about the chemistry of the sludge and the use of high temperature and pressure to oxidize the uranium because the process had not been demonstrated on a small scale.
Months later, a laboratory scale test was performed by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. It found in 2007 that the treatment adversely affected the chemical and physical properties of the sludge. But by that time the system had been constructed.
The project was dropped in 2007 when DOE concluded the system posed risks to workers during normal operations and could pose a risk to the public in an accident. Fixes to the system would be too expensive, DOE decided.
The audit said DOE should have required an analysis of potential solutions for packaging the waste, rather than settling on the European commercial system. Once it had selected the system, it should have performed a feasibility study and done laboratory testing sooner, the audit found.
Fluor Hanford said in a statement Tuesday that it diligently worked with DOE and other parties to ensure it met the project's objectives as efficiently and effectively as possible and ensured worker safety.
Fluor said that as it analyzed the chemical and radioactive makeup of the sludge, regulatory requirements and disposal options changed.
The audit also questioned whether a $1 million subcontract payment made to British Nuclear was appropriate given the failure of the project and if it was approved by DOE.
Although British Nuclear was interested in purchasing the commercial portion of the system, it was turned over to DOE and remains unused, the audit said. DOE spent about $5 million on that equipment.
DOE agreed with recommendations for management improvement in the audit, and that it look at recovering the $1 million plus interest.
The DOE Office of Environmental Management has taken steps to improve management across the DOE complex in recent years, it told the DOE Office of Inspector General. The audit acknowledged that many process improvement initiatives are under way.
"These reforms, once fully implemented, should increase the likelihood of successful project execution," the audit said.
Read more: http://www.thenewstribune.com/2011/02/23/v-lite/1555869/auditors-find-failed-project-wasted.html#ixzz1FQGFeTBN
No comments:
Post a Comment